BUYING ROKINON CINE 35,50,85, VERSUS KEEPING WIDER RANGE OF GOOD NIKONS.

[Robert Hart]

I have a good selection of metal Nikon AI unmatched stills lenses in the f1.4 and f1.2 speeds. They return a good image but of course are not standard geared and inconveniently rotate the opposite to cine lenses. I am toying with the notion of selling some of the set in favour of the convenience of the standard geared Rokinons Cine lenses in focal lengths 35mm, 50mm, 85mm.

Does anyone have an opinion as to the image from the Rokinons compared with f1.4 Nikons or the faster Nikon f1.2 lenses, 55mm, which is not the worlds greatest lens and the 58mm, which is genuinely sharp down to f1.4 and acceptable wide open.

Any advice appreciated.

 

[Ulf Krentz]

I also have a set of older AI glass and kept it for its organic, vintage look. Would love to have them in proper cine housing. With modern glass be prepared for a more "clinical" look. Both sets will have their place and I suggest to do a test for yourself. You might also take a look at the Sony Cine Alta primes which offer an exceptional value for their price. Big, heavy and PL mount though. Cheers!

 

[Marcus Friedlander]

I shot about half of my first feature on Nikon Ai lenses and loved the look! I WOULD ABSOLUTELY HOLD ONTO THOSE LENSES!!! Please do not sell them! Unless you sell them to me

We were shooting a horror feature in a forest, and I used the Nikon's for the "day" sequences (which were mostly about character drama so the vintage/organic lens look was perfect.) And used CP.2 Superspeeds for the "night" sequences, which were mostly about atmosphere and tone. The two looks complemented each other perfectly!!! And ever since then I've had a big soft spot for these lenses

As far as rokinons go, I've shot on rokinons a ton, and while I don't hate them, they are just plain boring and clinical, although still reasonably sharp. If you are finding that not having proper cine-lenses is really hurting you, I would still look elsewhere. Sigma Cine is a good place to start.


P.S. The reverse focus on the nikons is INCREDIBLY ANNOYING but luckily we were using a wireless follow focus, so it was a non-issue for my 1st AC.

 

[Robert Hart]

Ulf and Marcus.


Thank you for your replies and advice.

I do like the Nikons. If am shooting for myself, I don't fret about not having a follow-focus on them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m4Nr7g9Vrc

On a couple of small indie shoots the lenses went out on, they put focus gears on them. It worked but it was a bit of a hassle and slowed the process. Despite having the smallest gear which can go on the Chroszeil follow-focus ( an ancient one ) the lens movement remained a bit fast for accurate repeatability. They got by and did achieve some nice looks.

 

[Marcus Friedlander]

Sorry should have mentioned that the set of Nikon's I was shooting on were partly cine-vised. We had gear rings but did not have a steppless apeture.

 

[Mike Finegan]

The Rokinon are soft wide open; the 14 even more so and there is lots of field curvature - don't have actors on edge of frame with that one
As people have said several times you usually get what you pay for...

 

[Robert Hart]

Mike and Marcus.


Thank you for your comments and advice. - I was mostly minded to hang onto the Nikons and maybe shop around for some delrin gears for them. The aluminium gears I have tried were not great. They were fixed with little grub screws which distorted the lens barrel of a 35mm f2.8 and all would shift on the lens barrel when a wireless follow-focus was self-calibrating its end-stop points.

I'm currently using the Nikons with a modifed Speedbooster focal reducer on the SI2K. I probably should registered the adaptor design because it would be valid for all IMS-Mount cameras which are the SI2K and Digital Ikonoskop. Probably pointless though as HD and 2K are pretty much headed for dodobird status except for the few holdouts like me who can't or won't afford 4K+.

My accumulated set includes third-party "for Nikon" and FWIW, my unscientific impressions follow :-

14mm f2.8 Sigma-for-Nikon. - Soft wide-open. Good from f3.5 to f11. Faithful "apparent" colour rendition. Accentuated stretch in corners.
20mm f1.8 Sigma-for-Nikon. - Soft wide-open. Good from f3.5 to f11. Faithful "apparent" colour rendition. Some stretch in corners.
28mm f1.4 Nikon. - Adequate image wide-open. Sweet from f1.8 - f11.
35mm f1.4 Nikon. - Tends to be flarey wide-open and a bit soft. Sweetest from f4-f8. - Does not yield well via the Speedbooster.
40mm f2 Voigtlander-for-Nikon. - Seems to do well from wide-open.
42mm f2.8 Nikon AKA "pancake" lens. Slightly softer than other Nikons. Confers a sort-of Cooke look.
50mm f1.4 Nikon. Seems slightly flarey wide open.
55mm f1.2 Nikon. A real old-school metal lens. Soft and flares wide-open but useful from f2.8.
58mm f1.2 Nikon. Like the 28mm adequate wide-open sweetest from f1.4 to f8.
85mm f1.4 Nikon. Seems to flare a little wide-open. - Delightful for portrait look.
108mm f1.8 Nikon. Seems to flare a little wide-open. Delightful for portrait look.
135mm f1.8 Sigmatel-for-Nikon. Flarey and soft wide-open. Best from about f3.5 to f8. Also delightful for portrait look.
200mm f2 Nikon. Earlier lens but a good one.
50mm-500mm f4-f6.3 Sigma-for-Nikon zoom. - This lens style is a vacuum cleaner when zoomed and sucks in dust. Good to about 400mm then soft.
1042mm f10.5 MTO Mirror lens. Old-school Russian lens. Noticeably soft on closer subjects. Distance shimmer and haze hide this deficit.